Spurs_Bear
Well-Known Member
- Jan 7, 2009
- 17,094
- 22,286
We did. We just didn't play how you wanted us to play, ie with an extra midfielder.
Ratings v Arsenal
- Thread starter Bus-Conductor
- Start date
We did. We just didn't play how you wanted us to play, ie with an extra midfielder.
Paolo10
Well-Known Member
- Apr 6, 2004
- 6,179
- 7,621
It's clear that posters like you, BC, Dan Ashcroft and a good load of others all have some sort of fucking agenda and it's been clear for a long time. Against City and United we were at barebones and players were still to come in. City were very good, probably the best they've played all season...how does beating Arsenal and creating more good chances consistute getting it wrong?
You're all just itching to have a pop, it's almost like you can sense that you want us to lose just so you can have something to hold against the manager and to further fuel your agenda.
I didn't vote because the poll was oversimplified and it's not even a case of VDV or Defoe, it's about formations and again, is being used to try and make a point about the manager.
VDV is a better player, but Defoe is contributing this season and was our best forward against Arsenal, I've not said I'm averse to 5 in the middle or 4-2-3-1 or whatever you want to call it, but not at home to be honest and not when it's looking like Ade and Defoe can forge a good partnership and we're still winning.
Against Newcastle away I'd not mind the change in formation, but I wouldn't be adverse to Defoe playing that game either as they have fuck all in midfield and are certainly nowhere near the quality of Arsenal.
Either way people like you will have bones to pick at. Boring.
You're all just itching to have a pop, it's almost like you can sense that you want us to lose just so you can have something to hold against the manager and to further fuel your agenda.
I didn't vote because the poll was oversimplified and it's not even a case of VDV or Defoe, it's about formations and again, is being used to try and make a point about the manager.
VDV is a better player, but Defoe is contributing this season and was our best forward against Arsenal, I've not said I'm averse to 5 in the middle or 4-2-3-1 or whatever you want to call it, but not at home to be honest and not when it's looking like Ade and Defoe can forge a good partnership and we're still winning.
Against Newcastle away I'd not mind the change in formation, but I wouldn't be adverse to Defoe playing that game either as they have fuck all in midfield and are certainly nowhere near the quality of Arsenal.
Either way people like you will have bones to pick at. Boring.
pablo73
Well-Known Member
- Dec 6, 2006
- 3,980
- 13,614
You might be right but I would put you at the other end of the spectrum, with an agenda to defend Harry no matter what. What's wrong with the middle ground? Criticise when deserved, praise when merited.
tobi
Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Can't Lose
- Jun 10, 2003
- 17,604
- 11,812
Since you mentioned City...
After we signed Parker the manager said we were too open against them, as far as I'm concerned he put that team out for a reason. If he attempted to include suitable or makeshift players in the middle for the game then I'd buy the barebones excuse but he didn't, instead he decided to prove a point to the chairman.
It's called constructive criticism
It's called constructive criticism
Paolo10
Well-Known Member
- Apr 6, 2004
- 6,179
- 7,621
We were too open against them because we didn't have the players, Palacios was on his way and most likely couldn't risk injury, Modric still had one eye out the door, Huddlestone injured, Sandro injured, Livermore inexperienced, Jenas on the way out etc.
You don't know he was trying to prove a point, you don't know his thinking, you don't even know who realistically could play and would play or even who was good or poor in training.
You don't know shit and as poor as we were that's the best they've played all season.
And if that was to prove his point I think Parker coming in and being out-fucking-standing would prove that point slightly more that basically 'throwing' a game against a close rival....which by the way is complete fucking bullshit.
You don't know he was trying to prove a point, you don't know his thinking, you don't even know who realistically could play and would play or even who was good or poor in training.
You don't know shit and as poor as we were that's the best they've played all season.
And if that was to prove his point I think Parker coming in and being out-fucking-standing would prove that point slightly more that basically 'throwing' a game against a close rival....which by the way is complete fucking bullshit.
pablo73
Well-Known Member
- Dec 6, 2006
- 3,980
- 13,614
so Harry is perfect in your opinion and never makes mistakes?
StartingPrice
Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
- Feb 13, 2004
- 32,568
- 10,280
:up:
I had no problems with the way we started.
The Goons were there foor the taking, and I felt that if we pressurized them across the field the extra man up front would unnerve them.
We started like that, and they were clearly rattled. They couldn't keep hold of the ball, passes were going astray - they were in serious danger of imploding and doing a 'United'. at which point we had the perfect formation to exploit that.
That lasted for 10 - 15 minutes at the start. But then we started dropping off them. They got hold of the ball in midfield. They grew in confidence.
I still would have said it was generally even. And we had the better chances, apart from Gervinho's.
But at half-time, I clearly thought they had got hold of the game a bit, and would be coming out chasing the game, so it might be a good idea to bring Sandro on and take off either one of VDV/Defoe (in retrospect, showing that it is not easy to call, I think it would have been more appropriate taking off VDV/Adebayor). In any case, we had the advantage, that would have closed the game down in our favour, and the formation would have been ideally set up to hit them on the break.
How it panned out, the Goons come out fired up, put us under a lot of pressure, and got the equaliser. At which point Redknapp made the change most of us thought he should have made at half-time - and, from his pst match interview, he clearly thought about making at half-time. From then on, we did, indeed, close the game down, and the Goons hardly looked dangerous.
But, by that time, we were equal again, and had to get another goal to win.
So, the question, really is, would it have been better making the change, posibbly keeping a clean sheet, and in all likelihood adding to our one goal? Or, not making the change, allowing them to continue outnumbering us in midfield, and get back into the game, before we made the change anyway - but then having to push, again, to take the lead? Which is how it panned out.
I am, by no means, part of any anti-Redknapp agenda - indeed, if anything, I have been accused of being over-protective of the manager. But I clearly thought that bringing Sandro on was the thing to do at half-time, and subsequent events sugest that that was exactly the right thing to do. So, I'm not being vehemently anti-Redknapp, and I'm not nit-picking, or setting out with a predetermined idea of how we should have set-up, and castigating Redknapp for not doing it even though we won. But, as Pablo says, above, I believe in this instance this relatively minor criticism is warranted - doesn't stop me being ecstatic at the win, though.
lenny7
Don't worry. Bill Murray.
- Jan 28, 2011
- 11,103
- 39,441
I've long held the view that 'Arry does things like that to force Levy's hand, which although on the back of a 5-1 spanking does piss me off, generally speaking it doesn't really bother me to a great extent as I think the pair tend to complement each other, in that they end up reigning each other in, with a different chairman we could have 'done a Leeds' by now and with a different manager... well we'd probably be on our 3rd or 4th since 'Arry came in by now.
I like 'Arry, he's got his limitations, he does stuff that can get right on my tits, but at the end of the day the results have been (by and large) excellent, I would imagine it's without question that he has the best record against the scum of any of our managers in the prem, if not one of the best of all time, which is an achievement considering only really the start of this campaign have they truly taken a nosedive.
ShelfSide18
Well-Known Member
- Aug 23, 2006
- 8,386
- 3,122
Right this is getting ridiculous now, claiming that some of us wish to see us lose just so we can get on Harry's back. That is absolute nonsense, and I've already addressed this but I will repeat... Myself, BC, Sloth are fucking delighted we beat Arsenal, I personally am wearing a grin wider than the gaps we left in midfield at work this week, but to say we don't think we played well because of Harrys decisions is entirely valid. The 2 are mutually exclusive.
And it has also been said countless times that Harry has received plenty of praise this season, and every season, by those you claim to have an agenda against him - you plainly ignore this, because it doesn't suit your agenda! We all have them, we all sometimes get diverted by our own agendas on occasions.
I think on Sunday Harry got it wrong tactically, and it is testament to the fabulous squad he's assembled, and team spirit he's fostered that we still won the game - and I'm having a great week like every other Spurs fan that we did win, you'd just have to ask the gooners in my office...
pablo73
Well-Known Member
- Dec 6, 2006
- 3,980
- 13,614
Then there are going to be times when he makes mistakes and deserves criticism. I personally think we got away with it a bit about Arsenal and that we should have set up with Sandro and Parker in the centre. Even though we won, it's worth debating as we might not get away with it in future.
Spurs_Bear
Well-Known Member
- Jan 7, 2009
- 17,094
- 22,286
See I have no problem whatsoever with the debating about whether we could have set up differently etc etc, it's the bolded bit that is just categorically untrue. We beat Arsenal because we were better than them, we didn't get away with anything, it wasn't a smash and grab after they had all the chances and we happened to have 2 and scored 2.
Spurs_Bear
Well-Known Member
- Jan 7, 2009
- 17,094
- 22,286
I haven't been part of this debate but just to echo this before it gets silly, there is no way that SS18, BC and sloth want the team not to win. No way at all.
Dan Ashcroft I'm not convinced about, I've never seen him celebrate in a match thread and usually when there's nothing to moan about he's nowhere to be seen.
tobi
Clear Eyes, Full Hearts, Can't Lose
- Jun 10, 2003
- 17,604
- 11,812
Luka and Niko in CM alongside two wingers was the most suitable way of stopping the team from being open?
Livermore started away at Man Utd, all of a sudden he's too inexperienced to start at home against City?
Kaboul or Charlie can't do a job as a DM with Bassong playing at CB?
No sane person would play Niko and Luka in CM against that midfield, he knew what he was doing.
Bus-Conductor
SC Supporter
- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
- Thread starter
- #438
It's not just about how I want us to play. It's about how I believe we played that day. Giving Arsenal 62% of the ball and 55% of the territory saw us 3-1 down after 40 minutes a few months ago, and for most of the last 15 years has seen us fail to beat them. If Redknapp comes out and says "my plan was to allow Arsenal to completely dominate the football, not even press them, and hope to get a lucky break" then I'd still disagree, but would at least know it's deliberate. But you can listen yourself to what he said post match, he wasn't happy before halt time, and it costs us a goal and led to us withdrawing one of our best players and goal scorer just to get a foothold in midfield at a time when we were needing to score to win.
You're opinion that we played well seems to contrast with Redknapp's.
So lets hear what you think Redknapp gets wrong then. How about winning 9/18 home games last season ?
Here's some quotes from me recently, just to show you that I don't always let my "agenda" getting in the way of giving Redknapp credit:
My fulsome praise of the team and tactics (including the selection and performance of Defoe)
http://www.spurscommunity.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=2494246&postcount=104
From the Redknapp deserves credit thread:
We pressed Liverpool high up - and all over - the pitch today. That was the first thing that evidenced something Redknapp must have been working on. I noticed it during the Hearts game, said something about it, but added the caveat "lets see if it continues". I thought our pressing at Wolves was better as well.
Credit where it's due.
And
I am no apologist for Redknapp, believe me. But personally, I think there were various factors why we won today, and a couple of the factors were things Redknapp did. The pressing for me was the most important. Liverpool have had success doing it themselves to teams like Arsenal, and we are often a softer touch than Arsenal (witness ManC at home). So it was vital today that we worked hard and pressed them.
Paolo10
Well-Known Member
- Apr 6, 2004
- 6,179
- 7,621
Brilliant, well done for giving the best and most succesful manager we've had in my lifetime credit while at the same time bringing up the home record last season that ultimately cost us the CL.
While we only won 9 games, we only lost 1 and only United had a better record than that as for losses. We all know we drew too many games at home, was that down to Redknapp or the Chairman not signing the striking options we so desperately craved?
For those draws you're making an issue of there are very few teams we shouldn't have wiped the floor with at WHL last season, but again this is old news and yet you're still bringing it up? While you're at it you could mention our CL run when no one really fancied us to get out of the Group stages, all agains with a distinct lack of investment and injury problems.
Ignore the way the squad has been transformed and the quality we have now, instead, make an issue of poorer possession against a team which dominates possession in pretty much all their games, home and away....in a game we won (again, which doesn't usually happen for Spurs against Arsenal).
Bored talking about this now, such minor criticism (In a NLD we WON) weighed against such dramatic progress and comparitive success under the manager.
If he starts 4-4-2 against Newcastle, you can all make a thread registering your disgust.
Fuck this thread.
ShelfSide18
Well-Known Member
- Aug 23, 2006
- 8,386
- 3,122
Newcastle play 442 Paolo, so a 442 would be more than acceptable, although personally I'd still go 433. It's choosing your team according to what's put in front of you, you have failed to grasp this.
